근로기준법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the victim’s statement is partially unclear is due to the fact that the victim gave testimony at the expiration of four years from the delayed payment of the wage in this case, and despite the recognition of the Defendant’s criminal act when based on the F and G statements, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination:
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, the lower court’s judgment held that it is difficult to believe that the statement of each witness witness E, F, and G as shown in the facts charged of this case is recorded in the witness E, F, and G as shown in the facts charged of this case, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is the same as the amount of wages in arrears in relation to E.
It is insufficient to recognize without reasonable doubt, and judged that there is no other evidence to recognize it.
(1) At the time of submitting a written petition to the Ulsan Branch Office of the Busan Regional Labor Agency, E was placed in the Defendant’s office for two days at the Defendant’s office, and the Defendant did not pay the Defendant’s wages to one other.
After being written in the petition, on August 16, 2012, the statement made by the person on August 16, 2012 had worked for 150,000 won per day, and received 500,000 won out of four total wages of 800,000 won per day including E and resolved, but did not receive only E’s wages.
was written.
However, it does not mention whether there are three remaining wages except E.
(2) At the time of this court’s examination of witness, E stated that its daily allowance was KRW 150,000 per day due to the circumstances at that time, but the subsequent written statement was 180,000 per day and was later 2 days.
H’s daily allowances were KRW 120,000.
At the time, the statement about the amount of the daily allowance agreed between the defendant and E is reversed, and E is also reversed.